Court
Not sure of the edition or when I read it (probably fifth grade), but it has stuck with me in a cloudy sense. Until now I couldn't recall the title and author, although now the author does not surprise me. This story has stuck with me for more than a decade as one of my favorite sci-fi and/or short story.
So glad I finally stumbled upon it...now I can easily reread it
Quote to add “after she (Debra Austin) was cast as the Sylph in La Sylphide, someone staging the ballet questioned the decision, stating that she had never seen a Black Sylph. Given that a sylph is a mythological fairylike creature, the artistic director challenged the stager and replied, “Have you ever seen a sylph before?”
“Three years after becoming principal dancer, Lorraine [Graves] became a ballet mistress with the company, helping to run rehearsals and teach. This was in addition to her duties as an active dancer with DTH, proving her maturity and leadership skills even at a young age. These dual roles helped Lorraine find her confidence as a dancer, and, in her words, they have her “the opportunity to ‘see' myself and think about how I /want/ to see myself.”
https://reactormag.com/on-the-fox-roads-nghi-vo-2/
Maybe I'll come back to this
Tbr at: https://reactormag.com/you-dont-belong-where-you-dont-belong-kemi-ashing-giwa/
Heavy/dense yet also fluffy like the shelf-stable marshmallow fluff. Delightfully surreal, but also a bit much, going to take a break and try his ‘Hand-washing in America'.
tbr at https://reactormag.com/other-kelly-genevieve-valentine/
TBR https://reactormag.com/breathing-constellations-rich-larson/
I first encountered this as a song that my supervisor suggested that I play for a client. The song makes me cringe, as does the book.
The biggest wince is that I feel that it makes fun of people with physical differences. I get that the word choices are for rhyming but he could have been a wonky donkey because his walk was wonky due to having different horse shoes or bumping his foot or something. I also don't love the “hanky-panky” usage.
Not a review of the book, rather a review of the feelings, a diary entry, and boarder line rant.
It's not you it's me?
It's not the women, it's the time period?
I'm breaking up with this book because it makes me feel bad. It makes me feel ignorant, like a bad feminist, guilty, a little angry, annoyed, and made me argue with myself.
I couldn't get past the nature of the characters, such boy crazy, manipulative, frivolous, flat, say nothing bunch. ‘Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, and small minds discuss people.' I had assumed Austin to be a great mind, but her story comes off as delivered through that of the small and average minded.
I understand that women of the time were confined in socioeconomic/legal/cultural/etc. ways. but I can't accept them. I struggle to sympathize for them, I find myself strongly disliking them. Even with Elizabeth I find myself rolling my eyes at her, trying to imagine why walking three miles is hard. And that is a crux of the entire book. Because her not being able to get home conveniently for days moves the plot along.
I walk three miles in less than an hour (carrying a bag and usually a conversation). “But she wears petticoats, you wear jeans; and countryside is rough, you have sidewalks” says a dissenting voice. And the argument in my head goes on, meanwhile the audiobook keeps playing. Also they keep saying that Elizabeth walked there alone, but she had company for a good part of the way, and she doesn't correct them.
Oh also the believe that a woman has to change a man and/or manipulate him into marriage goes against my core beliefs.
I must have read this wrong, missed the point, or am just not compatible with this book.
Page 75: https://xenoflesh.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/guin-ursula-k-le-the-compass-rose_-short-stories.pdf
Hmmm, it's a bit... disconnected? Am I missing something? Maybe I should come back to it late
I recall reading this book, but I don't recall its content. Maybe I'll pick it up or digitally browse it at some point.
Since this book is hard to find and the ones I can find are of an exorbitant price, this animated short will have to suffice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGoICU1Y7C4
Left off on page 52 but have to return it. Hopefully will pick it back up soon.
Tbr https://mspachecogdhs.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/2/0/13206998/the_chrysanthemums_by_john_steinbeck.pdf
Page 41: https://xenoflesh.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/guin-ursula-k-le-the-compass-rose_-short-stories.pdf
I read a sample and it looked great, will try to get a hold of the rest of it.
To read around Christmas: https://www.eastoftheweb.com/short-stories/UBooks/Mark.shtml
In 2012, Barton's New York Times bestseller The Jefferson Lies: Exposing the Myths You've Always Believed About Thomas Jefferson was voted “the least credible history book in print” by the users of the History News Network website. A group of ten conservative Christian professors reviewed the work and reported negatively on its claims, saying that Barton misstated facts about Jefferson.
In August 2012, Christian publisher Thomas Nelson withdrew the book from publication and stopped production, announcing that they had “lost confidence in the book's details” and “learned that there were some historical details included in the book that were not adequately supported.” A senior executive said that Thomas Nelson could not stand by the book because “basic truths just were not there.”
“the book is nowadays no longer considered to be an authoritative or reliable account of the Allied bombing and destruction of Dresden during February 1945”
Joseph Nicolosi didn't practice psychology, but rather pseudoscience.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nicolosi
‘In 2013, Nicolosi appeared in Stephen Fry's television documentary Stephen Fry: Out There, which examined different attitudes to homosexuality. Nicolosi informed Fry that “sixty percent of our clients now are teenagers. Parents call up in a panic because they found out their son is looking at gay porn, and, of course we have to get him into therapy”. After the segment, Fry says that “for all his talk of success, Nicolosi is unable to find one of his ex-gays to talk to us”. Fry then speaks with Daniel Gonzales, a former client of Nicolosi's who did not have success in changing his sexual orientation. Gonzales condemns the therapy.'
‘Like all forms of conversion therapy, reparative therapy is pseudoscientific, based on faulty assumptions, opposed by mainstream medical and psychological practitioners, and potentially harmful to patients. Some states have enacted laws against conversion therapy.'
A reminder that psychology has a checkered past and that that past isn't necessary all that long ago as this book was published in 2002. Also, that sometimes psychology is a misused tool/idea and wanders into pseudoscience territory.
I was saddened to see that about 11% of the reviews are 5 stars as I see this concept as being inherently harmful and bigoted. I'm also concerned that Goodreads recommended it to me...what weird algorithms.
Worth a glance:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nicolosi
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, “NARTH presents its methods as based on scientific fact rather than religious belief”.
Thanks SPLC :D
Also:
In 2009, Royal College of Psychiatrists criticized Nicolosi's appearance at a conference in London, saying that: “there is no sound scientific evidence that sexual orientation can be changed” and “furthermore, so-called treatments of homosexuality create a setting in which prejudice and discrimination can flourish.”
Didn't love the writing style.
Maybe one day I'll pick it back up...